Page 2688 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (3.16): Madam Speaker, the Government has no difficulty at all in supporting the principle of the MPI that Mr Stevenson has proposed, namely:
The need for the ACT Parliament to support the national flag.
We do support the national flag. We do that as a government, and I believe that members of the Government individually support the national flag. It is fair to say that national flags are important. They become a recognised symbol that should be valued and respected. There are also other flags of significance in our community - the Aboriginal flag that is on a desk behind me and the Eureka flag, although it is somewhat overly associated with other groups now. Another flag that is perhaps more internationally recognised for Australia than the Australian flag itself is the boxing kangaroo. We need also to remember that national flags change. Indeed, as Mr Connolly said, the basic background colour of the Australian flag has changed in its lifetime. Should Australia's flag change in the future, our support for that flag, however it may emerge in the future, will continue.
So, we agree with this clear statement by Mr Stevenson. It is a simple and moderate and acceptable statement. I will not comment on the flamboyant rhetoric of the speech he read into the record. I believe that generally Australians adopt a sensible attitude to the flag. In this country I do not think there is any significant amount of jingoistic nonsense in politics generally. We do not beat our breasts unduly. We take a practical and sensible approach to things. I do not see in Australia any excesses of flag waving. I think we put the Australian flag into the perspective of Australia as a modern, practical and realistic country. I am sure that that will continue, as will our support of the national flag, whatever its design of the day.
MR DE DOMENICO (3.19): Madam Speaker, I also rise to support in principle the words of Mr Stevenson and Mr Wood. I think there is very little else for me to say. There was a motion on the notice paper, as people are aware, along the same lines. People of all political parties are going to get together and discuss that, and to try to settle it in a sensible way. All I can say is that, for once, we can all agree with Mr Stevenson and Mr Wood, and we have tripartisan support. Is that a word, Mr Wood? You are the former schoolteacher. I think there is tripartisan support.
MADAM SPEAKER: The discussion has concluded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
MRS CARNELL: I seek leave to make a personal explanation under standing order 46.
Leave granted.
MRS CARNELL: Thank you. Mr Berry's allegation yesterday that I had misled parliament - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .